Loading...
64-178 - 58 SWAMPSCOTT ROAD - CONSERVATION COMMISSION 1 _. F, C�tn. Ga,�,J rKa„r�'J s�iKus ���z:-r ;,: 1 � .�� - - . 310 CMR 10 . 99 DEP File No. 64-178 Form 8 (To be provided by DEP) City/Torn Salem Applic tHoward A. Fafard Commonwealth of Massachusetts Certificate of Compliance Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, 540 From Salem Conservation Commission Issuing Authority To Howard A. Fafard Add (Name.) ress) Date of Issuance September 12 1996 This Certificate is issued for work regulated by an Order of Conditions issued to Howard A. Fafard dated 5/11/89 and issued by the Salem Conservation Co- nission 1. ❑ It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above- referenced Order of Conditions has been satisfactorily completed. 2. ❑ It is hereby certified that only the following portions of the work regulated by the above-referenced Order of Conditions have been satisfactorily completed: ;If the Certificate of Compliance does not include the entire project, specify what -ortions are included. ) 3 . ® It is hereby certified that the work regulated by the above- referenced Order of Conditions was never commenced. The Order of Conditions has lapsed and is therefore nc longer valid. No future work subject to regulation under the Act :nay be commenced without filing a new Notice of Intent and receiving a new Order of Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Leave Space Blank) Effective 11/10/89 8-1 4 . [] The certificate shall be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located. The Order was originally recorded or. (date) at the Registry of Book Page 5. The following conditions of the Order shall continue: (Set forth any conditions contained in the Final Order, such as maintenance or monitoring, which are to continue for a longer period. ) Issued by i Signature ( When issued by the Conservation Co fission this Certificate must be signed by a majority of is members. On this 12th day of September 19 96 before me personally ppeared the aboved named to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free azn and deed. otary Publi My/ ccmmissio.^. pire Detach on dotted lira and submit to the Commission ............................................................................................................ To Salem Conservation Commiss* Issuing Authority Please be advised that the Certificate of Compliance for the project at: File Nuuuber has been recorded at the Registry of and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property on , 19 if recorded land the instrument number which identifies this transaction is if registered land the document number which identifies this transaction is Signature Applicant 6-2 FAFARD REAL ESTATE AND DEVELOPMENT CORP. (A:m 290 ELIOT STREET ASHLAND, MASSACHUSETTS 01721 TEL. (508) 881-1600 FAX (508) 875-8610 Residential Sales (508)881-6662 Commercial Sales/Leasing (508)881-1512 June 21, 1996 Salem Conservation Commission JUN 261996 Salem City Hall One Salem Green �Orii 6@us"as"a9i1 `' Salem MA 01970 Subject: Request for Extensions of Order of Conditions Members of the Commission, We would like to request extensions on the Orders of Conditions numbered 64-152 and 64-153 which are due to expire on July 24, 1996. The OOC which has been designated as 64-178 is also due to expire and we would like a Certificate of Compliance indicating that the work has never commenced and that no future work can be initiated without receiving a new OOC. Thank you for your attention to this matter, if you have any questions please feel free to contact this office. 5t�b� D. Preston Hall Project Manager 9 Form 5 �jAy°G � pEOE File No. 64- 178 /� �® (To be Provided Dy OEOEI Ji /,� Commonwealth cityiTown Salem , of Massachusetts ® A001XWt Howard A. Fafard Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act G.L. c. 131, §40 From Salem Conservation Cnmmisc; nn - - To Howard A. Fafard same (Name of Applicant) (Name of property owner) Address 290 Eliot St. Ashland, Ma. Address same This Order is issued and delivered as follows: ly by hand delivery to applicant or representative on S / 1 1 /89 (date) ❑ by certified mail,return receipt requested on (date) This project is located at S w Amp r t Rd The property is recorded at the Registry of Essex - Book N . A . Page N A Certificate(if registered) 54812 The Notice of Intent for this project was filed on 4 / 1118(? (date) The public hearing was closed on A n r i i 9 7 r] O n o (date) Findings The Salem Conservation Commission has reviewed the above-referenced Notice of Intent and plans and has held a public hearing on the project. Based on the information available to the Commission at this time. the Commi ssine has determined that the area on which the proposed work is to be done is significant to the following interests in accordance with the Presumptions of Significance set forth in the regulations for each Area Subject to Protection Under the Act(check as appropriate): ❑ Public water supply i7 Flood control ❑ Land containing shell0sh © Private water supply SI Storm damage prevention ❑ Fisheries ® Ground water suppty II Prevention of pollution ❑ Protection of wildlife habitat 51 RILE COPY Therefore, the COMMISSION hereby finds that the following conditions are necessary,in accordance with the Performance Standards set forth in the regulations. to protect those inter- ests checked above. The COMMISSION orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with said conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the fol- lowing conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. General Conditions 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein,and with all related statutes and other regulatory meas- ures,shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. 2. This Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges: it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state or local statutes. ordinances,by-laws or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply (a) the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act: or (b) the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance and both that date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill,containing no trash, refuse. rubbish or de- bris. including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster,wire, lath, paper,cardboard. pipe, tires,ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles or parts of any of the foregoing. 7. No work shall be undertaken until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed or, if such an appeal has been filed, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. 8. No work shall be undertaken until the Final Order has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the land Court for the district in which the land is located. within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. The recording information shall be submitted to the C 011 M I S S I O N on the form at the end of this Order prior to commencement of the work. 9. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less than two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, File Number 64- 178 10. Where the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering is requested to make a determination and to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before the Department. 1 1. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall forthwith request in writing that a Certificate of Compliance be issued stating that the work has been satisfactorily completed. 12. The work shall conform to the following plans and special conditions: 5-2 v , Plans: rtle Dated Signed and Stamped by: On File with: Ind . Condo , Salem rev. 4/ 18/89 James E. McLoughlin ,P . E . Salem Conservation Business Park Commission Special Conditions(Use additional paper J necessary) 1 . Work shall conform to above referenced plans . 2 . Any changes in building sites or building sizes shall require an amendment to this Order of Conditions . '3. No salt shall be used as a de-icing agent. 4 . Prior to construction , staked haybales shall be installed to protect the nearby wetlands . 5 . Cas traps shall be installed in catch basins . 6 . Conservation Commission members and/or their designated agent reserve the right to enter and inspect the site during construction . 7 . As-built plans stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Commission prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance . ........................................................................................................................................ .............................................. (Leave SOeCe 81enkl 5-3A Plans: Tillte Dated Signed and Stamped by: On File with: Special Conditions(use additional paper if necessary) .................................................... .............. .....................................................................-....... . ......... (LaRve SMICe BIWkI 5-38 Issued By SALE::; Conservation Commission Signature(s) �`�4 At Al \ 1 This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. On this 5r/� day of LM G '--/ 19_Y'� _ befcre me personally appeared 4/� R 1Z a_ � C'f' to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/atie executed the same as his/her tree act and deed., / -7 Notary Public My commission expires The aoigic ht.the owner.any person aggnmied by this Order.any owner of tend abutting the tend upon which the proposed work is to be done or any ten residents Of the cry d town In which Such tend Is located are hereby nottied of thew right to redWat the Department Of enwo entel Quality Engineering to hsps a Suomsmi rig Order.providing the redueet u made by caretied mail or hard delivery to the Deoartmenr within ten days from the date of bausnae of this Order.A copy at the reoueet snail Of the Same lime be sem by ceratied metl or nehd delivery to me cdh,m,Boon Commissnn and the apolCJnt. 0 o- t Detach on dotted fine and submit to the prim to commencement of work. ...._.....»._.»...._........................... _ ••• —•-•—' is wmq Authority J To 1 Please be a"sed met me Order of Condittons for the protect a File Number has been recorded at the Registry of and has been noted in me[math of titre of the affected property in accordance with General Condmon 8 on 9_— It recorded two. the Instrument number which Identifies this transaction is It registered two.the document number winch rdenbfles this transaction Is Apotcant h Signature i 5•aA Issued by the Department of Environmental Quality Englneenng. Signature On this day of 19 before me personally appeared to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he/she executed the same as his/her free act and deed. Notary Public My commission expires The applicant.rie Owner.any perwo aggrieved by this Suce aamq Order.any owner of lard abutitng me lana wan witch the ant poser!wyk!t rn be dohx cr r—!eh PersmaV v Jam r G.L c.30A.510/..are hxoey::ot8ec!of cit"ngr:to recuaat= :+��; hearing pursuant to G.L 30A. S 10.Providing the reausat is made by cerafied mad a hand delivery to the Department within ten days from the date at ieaurnca of the SUPeraeong Order.and is addressed b: Docket Clerk.Office of General Cow".Deowthtent of Envirdnrn ntid Ouasty Enginewng.One Winter Street.Swim.MA 02108.A copy,of Me rocuest shell at the same erre be sent by certified mad Or hand delivery to the conaefvabon commission.the addlicant.and arty Other perry. P.Notice of Claim tooan AOludlcadry Hearing shelf conicity with me Geo enanrs Rules for Adludhntorr Proceedings.310 CMR 1.01(e).and shelf adman the Madding nformabon: (al the DEOE Wetlands File Number.name of the wolieent and addrsas at the prelact: Ibl the complete name.address and telethon number of the party filing the request.and.it reoresented by counsel.the name and address Of the attorney: (c) me names and adoreuaea of all other tabes.if krdwn: - td) a clear and concise statement of f 11 the tecta which are grounds for the Drocewng.(2)the Oblecbons to this Superseding Order. including spemflrally,the manna in which It is Nlpeo to be inconsistent with the Decarenenrs Wetlands Requlabons(310 CMR 10.001 and doea not cont., to to the orotecbon of the nteresb dMbfied in the Act.and(3)the relief sought through the AdiU- dicatory nearing.Including soecificaily the changes dewed in the Superseding Order. (at a statement mat a copy Of the reduest has beef)sent to the monewit.the conservation commission and each Other own,Or rep• resentahve Of such party.it known. Failure to submit all necessary mtormanon may result in a dismissal by the 0e0ertmant of the Nonce of CIa.m for an Adjudicatory Hearing. Detach an dotted line and submit to the prldr to commencement of work. To Issuing Authority Please oe advised mat the Order of Conditions for me protect at -- File Number has been recorded at the Registry of and has been noted In the chem of five of tho affected ordoerty In accordance with General Condthon 8 on If iecorced land. the instrument number wh,Ch Identifies this transaction Is If registered land. the document number which Idennhes this transaction Is Signature Apolrcant 5.48 zHR&+tY+:+SRBf +LYN +EF tY� 2}i8=ix+_k88 iuf � S +�:c8 tY }i Sic 6 H� NORFOLK ENVIRONMENTAL 378tnal Page Sueet Corp.o81dg. x Stoughton, MA 02072-1141 Phone (611) 297-5700 Fax (617) 797-7050 July 15, 1994 Attorney Paul Beattie Fafard Real ),state quid Development Co. 290 Elliot Street Ashland, Massachusetts 01721 J111, 2 0 i� 4 Re: 58 Swampscott Road, Salem Property Dear Paul: In reference to the subject site, this is to provide an opinion concerning conditions found at the Salem, Mass. property. After a review of the documentation provided by your office, which included investigations on the property by IEP, Inc. (1985), Kur-r. Associates (1980), Norfolk Environmental (1-994), and various correspondence from the Salem Conservation Commission the following is a synopsis of previous and current work performed: Previous Investigations: 1. The site was listed by LEEP as a "Location to he investigated" (I'TH1) on July 15, 1987 resulting from conditions observed at the site during the 21F Site Assessment performed by IEP in March 1985 and subsequent site inspection by DEP in June 1985. 2. DEP listed the site as a LTBI based upon an observation of a number of waste drums and contaminated soils which were being removed from the site by Fayard under the direction of IEP in June 1985. The initial removal action involved the removal of the waste drums (Which were presumed to previously contain paint) and approximately 600-700 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soils. The soil removal was based upon a limited Providing Environmental Engineering Services to Industry and Government since 1978 vrovimng tnvvronrnenrar taymeermp acrvrurs w Irmusur enu uuvurnrrrcu. norry .�... SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27.94 15 :58 No .005 P .03 Attorney Paul Beattie July 15, 1994 Page 2 test pit characterization performed by IFP in the vicinity of the Subsequently installed Kurz Associates monitoring wells KOW-1, KOW-2, KOW-3, KOW-4, and KOW-6. A review of the IEl' test pit logs revealed that a black "organic" material was encountered in several of the test pits which exhibited an "Oil smell". Subsequent analyses of samples from the test pits exhibited elevated levels of oil and grease. IEP also installed test pit piezometers in test pit groundwater. 3. According to Kurz Associates, a total of 1400 cubic yards (c.y.) of contaminated soil was excavated at the site under IEP direction, of which 700 c.y. was removed for offsite disposal at Narragansett Improvement Co. in Rhode Island. Due to the extensive quantities of soils, IEP recommended halting further excavation and testing of the stockpiled soils. Elevated levels of TPII (2,250-5,730 ppm) were found in the stockpiled soils. A petroleum fingerprint of this material showed the presence of a weathered No. 6 fuel oil. The stockpiled material was subsequently removed and reutilized as road sub-base, northeast. of the site at Whalers Lane, Bengal Lane, and Celestial Lane in Salem. 4. An exploratory boring and monitor well installation program was performed by Kurz Associates in 1988 and 1989 to further characterize the vertical and lateral extent of soil and groundwater contamination throughout the site. '1'hc program consisted of performance of nine (9) soil borings and installation of two inch PVC monitor wells at various locations on the site. Two of the borings and wells were installed with a hand auger, due to inaccessibility of these locations in swamp areas of the site. S. Samples from the soil borings and monitor wells were taken by Kurz Associates in 1988 and 1989. Results from this sampling event showed the presence of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPII) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at low concentrations. Monitor well KOW-2 exhibited TPII levels in excess of current reportable RC-GW1 standards but less than RC- GW2 standards. This well was also sampled for dissolved metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and lead) which were non- SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 ,94 15 :58 No .005 P .04 Attorney Paul Beattie July 15, 7.994 Page 3 detectable in the groundwater. Well KOW-1 exhibited 1,1 dichloroethylene in excess of RC-GW1 and RC-GW2 levels. it should be noted that the reportable concentrations for groundwater (RC-GW1 and RC-GW2) for this compound are very low (I ppb). Wells KOW-5 and KOW-6 exhibited levels of methylene chloride in excess of RC-GWJ but much less than RC- GW-2 standards. Other VOCs found in excess of RC-GWI were perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene in KOW-6, although levels found were less than RC-GW2 standards. A composite sample from four soils borings samples taken in wetland areas of the site showed a TPH level less than current reportable concentration for soil (RC-Sl). Soil samples from the marsh area were noted to comprise black organic nlud and fine sands. Very low levels of 11Cfis (0.21 ppm) were also measured in this sample. This is below the current reportable concentration for this compound. Also, one groundwater sample from monitor well KOW-2 was analyzed utilizing a petroleum fingerprint analysis. The sample result indicated the presence of weathered No. 6 fuel oil. 6. The Kurz Associates work reported a dispersed area of overburden contamination in groundwater and soils at the site. The work included a preliminary evaluation of indicator compounds for formulation of a risk assessment. The evaluation also touched upon exposure pathways and identified two potential groundwater receptors: 1. North Shore Tennis and Squash Club (approximately 1000 ft. downgradient) and 2. McSweeney Auto Body (approximately 200 It. upgradient) of the site. The McSweeney site appears to be separated by a hydraulic: boundary (pond and marsh wetlands) from the subject property. The Kurz preliminary risk evaluation concluded that the site does not pose any risk to human receptors via on or offsite groundwater or contact with on site soils. 7. The possibility of additional contamination west of the study area was also mentioned in the Kurz report. Significant contamination in this area was considered unlikely based upon results of sampling of wells KOW-3 and KOW-4 which are upgradient and toward the western portion of the site. Based upon the findings in SERRFINI/DRRLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 .94 15 :58 No .005 P .05 Attorney Paul Beat tie July 75, 1994 Page 4 the Kurz investigation, no further investigations or soil removal were considered warranted at the site, although it was recommended that precautions be taken if any future excavations were undertaken during .development of the property, 8. The site contains an unspecified quantity of dredge spoils from the Liberty Marina in Danvers which were deposited on the northeastern portion of the property adjacent to Maynard Plastics. The dredge spoils were tested for RCRA hT-toxicity criteria as specitied at the time under Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Regulations. Levels of contaminants found in samples from the spoils were well below the criteria. The samples were taken by Tighe and Bond on behalf of Danvers Yacht and Marina. The material is believed to have been placed at the subject site sometime in the late 1.980's. 9. A third party critique of the IhI' and Kurz Associates work was performed by Gulf of Maine Research Center, Inc. (GMRC) on behalf of a prospective buyer of the property. in general, GMRC agreed with the findings of the Kurz investigation, but expressed concern about the need for additional investigation on the southern portion of the site, the apparent petroleum contamination found near KQW-7, and the private well on the McSweeney Auto Body property. GMKC also recommended that a current round of samples be taken from the existing, groundwater monitor wells. 10. An October 1992 letter from KAI, successor corporation to Kurz Associates reiterated the lindings of the Kurz investigation; that the site does not pose a risk to private wells in the vicinity of the site and made reference to the new Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCF) rules in evaluating site conditions. Current Investigation Results Pal'ard retained Norfolk Environmental (formerly Sanborn Environmental Consultants) in September 1993 to provide an assessment and update of conditions at the subject site and to provide an 1.SP opinion for the site under the revised MCP which became SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27.94 15 :58 No .005 P .06 Attorney Paul Beattie July 15, 1994 Page 5 effective October 1, 1993. Norfolk performed a site visit and documentation of current site conditions, file review and research concerning the reported private well at McSweeney Auto Body, and evaluated site conditions under the context of the revised MCP regulations. Under a subsequent contract with Falard, Norfolk performed sampling of groundwater and soils at the site to augment previous sampling, results in order to formulate a Licensed Site Professional (LSP) opinion for site, which is currently listed as a "transition site" under the new regulations. The following is a summary of the recent investigations and work performed to date by Norfolk Fnvironmental: I. A site reconnaissance was performed on October 1, 1993. Conditions at the site were basically as described in the previous Kurz Associates investigation. One monitor well (KOLN-4) was noted to be destroyed. The site was noted to contain miscellaneous construction debris, old tires, car batteries, and suspect asbestos containing materials (ACM). The casing on KOW- 5 was noted to be damaged, apparently by construction equipment. The southern portion of the site appeared to be virgin land as opposed to the northern portion, which is cleared. Evidence of excavation was noted to have been recently excavated for borrow material in the southern portion. The soils appeared to be uncontaminated in this area with no evidence of previous disposal activity on this portion of the property. Two areas near the construction trailer on site, however, showed evidence of minor oil stains, which appeared to be from spillage from virgin lubricating oil cans noted in close proximity to the trailer. 2. An inquiry was made at the Salem Board of Health (Mr. Robert Blankhorn) in October 1993 concerning the construction details and status of the McSweeney Auto Body water well. Mr. Blankborn advised it representative of Norfolk l.invironmental that there were no records or permits on file concerning this well. The well, if in existence, was constructed prior to private well registration and permitting requirements of the Board of 1Jealth. The fact that this well is upgradient of the Fafard site, the presence of available public water on Swampscott Road, and the SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 .94 15:58 No .005 P .07 Attorney Paul Beattie July 15, 1994 Page 6 lack of construction details or permits for this well makes the prospect for application of GW - 1 standards to the Fafard site unlikely, due to the presence of this well. Depending upon the reasonable foreseeable use of the site, the appropriate groundwater designation will be either GW-2 or GW-3. 3. A personal inquiry was made at McSweeney Auto Body on April 21, 1993 by it Norfolk Environmental representative. According to Mr. McSweeney, there is no private well present o11 his property for sanitary or other purposes. Mr. McSweeney stated that previous consultants are misinformed about the private well and that it was never installed. "Phis information could not be confirmed, however, by Norfolk personnel. 4. A supplementary round of groundwater saunples was taken from existing monitor wells KOW-1, KOW-2, KOW-3, KOW-S, KOW-6, KOW-7, and KOW-8 for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). Results from these samples indicated that the quality of groundwater at the site is less than the RC-GW2 reportable concentrations for VOCs arld TPH at the site (See Table 1 ). Groundwater exceeds RC-(.WI parameters only for TPII (KOW-2 and KOW-7) under current site conditions. The presence of decayed organic materials was observed in groundwater from these two wells, however, and it is believed that this may account for much of the measured TPH which is a common interference in this analytical method (FPA 418.1). Also, since EPA method 624 was utilized for VOCs, the raw data and chromatogram was double checked for possible presence of 1 ,1 dichloroethylene. None was noted present above the method detection limit of 1 ppb. S. The solid waste debris and construction materials at the site were stockpiled and subsequently removed by Fleet Environmental Services under a contract directly with Fafard on June 16, 1994. Additional debris removal will be necessary due to recent vandalism of the on-site construction trailer, which was set on fire sometime in June 1994. SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 .94 15 :58 No .005 P .08 Attorney Paul Beattie ,July 15, 1994 Page 7 Recommended Disposition of site The subject site is currently listed as a "Location to be Investigated" or "LTBI" and is categorized as a transition site under the new MCP regulations. The site does not have a "Waiver of Approvals", and future actions at the site are governed by the revised MCP regulations. A previous removal action was performed at the site in 1985 which is comparable to an "Immediate Response Action" or IRA under the new rules. The previous response action, coupled with the comparison of existing contaminant levels to RG-GW2 and KC-S2 reportable concentrations is believed to have resulted in a current site condition of no significant risk when compared to the applicable Method I groundwater and soil standards for the site (assumed to be GW-2 and S-2), based upon available information and the fact that the reasonable foreseeable use of this property is commercial/industrial. Given these conditions, no further action appears to be warranted at the site. On this basis, it is believed that a reportable release previously occurred at this site (e.g. waste drums containing paint and metal filings), but the response actions previously performed in 1985 appear to meet the objectives of a Response Action Outcome (RAO) under 310 CMR 40.1000. Based upon our observations of site conditions, we do not believe that additional sampling is warranted on the southern and western portions of the site. An LSP opinion form must be filed with DEP to document these findings. We also do not believe that additional significant benefits to the environment will result from an attempt to remediate this site to background levels for TPH. As stated previously, it is believed that much of the '1P11 contamination reported in the wetland is a result of natural organic material which is a common interference inherent in the analytical method used to measure 'fell. No VOGS were found in existing monitor wells in the most recent groundwater sampling event. The costs to attempt to remediate the low levels of TPII in the areas which are swamp and wetland are not justified and would result in disruption of more than 5000 square feet of wetland area at the site. Accordingly, we do not believe that it is feasible or necessary to remediate the site to background. SERRFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 .94 15 :58 No .005 P .09 Attorney Paul Beattie July 15, 1994 Page 8 Please contact me with any questions or comments you may have concerning the attached ISP Evaluation Opinion and optional supporting Response Action Outcome Statement for this property. Note that since this is a transition site, the RAO tiling fee of $750.00 does riot apply. �t1t UfA� tisk OF Kt Sincerely, f o MpaAN 4 No.33"58 Brian V. Moran, P.E. NAL cN� S%,_yeti Licensed Site Professional r°"v BVM/r nk Attachments CD CL 0 0 0 Z , „° Table I- Groundwater Sampling Results - 58 Swampscott Road, Salem, MA u Results In ug/L (ppb), except TPH In mg/l. (ppm) rn r` Compound KOW-1 KOW-2 KOW-3 KOW-4 KOW-5 KOW-6 KOW-7 KOW-8 PC-G1N1 RC-GM r, TPH 10.2)/BR (4.0)/8.4 (ND)/BR (0.1 )/' (0.1)/BR (0.3)/BR (1.4)/5.2 (0.4)10.7 1 50 Toluene (108)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/' (ND)BR. (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR 1 ,000 6,000 Me-C12 (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/' (29)/BR (33)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)iBR 5 50,000 00 1,1 DCE (13)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/' (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)iBR 1 1 a t-1,2 DCE (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/' (ND)/BR (47)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)iBR 100 50,000 e 0o PCE (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/' (ND)/BR (13)/BR (ND)/BR (ND)/BR 5 3,000 0 U-) o TCE (ND)/BR (ND)BR (ND)/BR (ND)/- (ND)/BR (28)/BR (ND)BR (ND)/BR 5 300 Z J W Notes: ( ) - Kurz Sampling Results: 17121/89, 2/22189, 7/7/89 Others- Norfolk Sampling Results: 4/21/94, 5/11194 ND - Non Detected BR - Below Reporting Limits Z ' - Well Detroyed H J cc Q - A Z W Cr W W SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 .94 15:58 No .005 P • 11 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection BWSC-004 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup RESPONSE ACTION 'JTCOME (RAO) STATEMENT '' kmaNwpsr: (pursuant to 310 CMR 40,10SS) H 3 I` 0039. A. RELEASE OR THREAT OF RELEASE LOCATION: Release Name if Previously Assigned(classified sites only): Fafard Co s-truction _ Street 58-Swampscott Road 92°29 ' 454'N 70°55' 28i'W ---- Location Aid: CeyRown: Snleut. MA._._. ........... -• _.. Zip Code:U 1�LlU...., – Additional Release Tracking Numbers Addressed in this RAO: Nowdo a clear and accurate description of the location of the site or the location and boundaries of Ito disposal site or portion Of ilia disposal S119 to which the RAO applies,as specified in 310 CMR 40.1003(4)with this submitral. 16 a site Or disposal bile map Or survey attached to this RAO Stormont? ❑ No ® Yes Does this RAO apply to a portion of a disposal site? U No 11 Yes If yes,attach a stalement regarding the relationship of the RAO Statement to any other RAO Statements Thai have been filed for the disposal site.it applicable,together with a statement as to whether any additional rOspOn6a actions aro headed for any other portions of the disposal site. B. PERSON SUBMITTINQ J1AO STATEMENT: Fafard Real Estate & Development Co. Nano OI Organization: p Name of Contact: Pau1 Beattie title: Corvorate Counsel Sua011290 El Iiot Strnpf• ... ... City/town: Ashland, Stale: MA ZipCodc: 01721 .. Telephone s -,508- 881 - - 1600 Ext. _.. !'C. RELATIONSHIP TO RELEASE OR THREAT OF RELEASE OF PERSON SUBMITTING RAO STATEMENT- (check one specify) iXrl RP specify(circle one): Owner Operator Generator Transporter Other RP: F ) PRP Spacify(oircfe one): Owner Operator Generator Transporter Other PRP: ❑ Fiduclary/Secured Lender ❑ Agency/Public Utility on a Right of Way �.� Other Person: O. RESPONSE INFORMATION: RAO Status: [Vj�1 First 1-1Revised 4N Was initial notification oral? No ❑ Yes Date: Is A 1`1010ase Notification Form(RNF)attached? wr No ❑ Yes Was a RNP previously subminctl? ��a No [1 Yos Dale: — /...._– /— (No fee– transition Is a RAO Canpliance Fco attached? ty No site) ❑ Yes A fee k Ncuired 120 days after Release Nolificatiori and prig to tier Classificeaon. E. RAO INFORMATION: RISK CHARACTERIZATION GROUNDWATER SOIL RAOCLAS$: METHOD: CATLGORY: CATEGORY: U A-1 G 6-1 ® I C! GW-I A-2 ❑ B-2 ❑ 2 GW-2 ® S-2 ❑ A-3 ❑ C ❑ 3 ❑ GW-3 U S-3 Was contaminalion reduced to background levels)al a disposal site? fX1 No El Yes Is this RAO based upon the implementation of an Activity and use Limitation? ®No ❑ Yes If yes.Indicate the type of Activity and Use Limitation implemented at the disposal site: Date filed with Registry of Deeds: -_ /_ /_ Registry or Court Location: - %ok/Pago Number(or other identaieq: - Attach TO this RAO Statement a copy of any and all Activity and Use Limitations which have bash implemented under 310 CMA 40.1070 and an Activity and Use Limitation Opinion pursuant to 310 CMR 40.10W2)(g). Will Post-RAO Opetation and Maintenance(0&M)be conducted at the site pursuant t0 310 CMR 40.0696(for Class C RAOs only)? U NO ❑ Yes If yes•check one: ❑ Active O&M ❑Passive 0&M Attach to this HAD Statement a description Of any operation,maintenance.and/or monitoring that will be required to confirm and/or maintain those conditions at The deposal site upon which the RAO is based. Revised 10/1/03 This oRn is printed ort recycled papar, Page 10 3 SERAFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27,94 15:58 No .005 P . 12 t Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection BWM004 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup RESPONSE ACTIO (OUTCOME (RAO) STATEMENT ftb a (pursuant to 010 CMR 4D.toS6) 3 - 0039 F. RESPONSE ACTIONS COMPLETEDt (Check all drat apply) COMPLETION STATEMENT TYPE OF PREVIOUSLY RESPONSE ACTION: YES NO ATTACHED SUBMITTED DATE OF DOCUMENT Immediate Response Action' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ /— Rebase Abatement Measure' ❑ ❑ ❑ —/� 1_ Ultily-Related Abatement Messum' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase I El u ❑ ® /.a.._ /-&5 Phase II ® ❑ ❑ ® /-Z t'haso III ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase IV ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ /— /�_ Phase V ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ —/� /` 'It multiple ections were completed at It disposal site,provide an attachment stating the date of the Completion Statement for 00th. G. DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE ACTIONS: Provide details on allacilmonts.as warranted. (Cheek all that apply) REMOVAL OF REMEDIATION WASTE: OTHER RESPONSE ACTIONS: U Contaminated Water ❑ Drainage Controls ® Contaminated Soils ❑ OermslDikosgmpoundmonts (check all that apply): ❑Excavate ❑ TemporaryCovers/Ceps ❑Stora - ❑ Waste/Product Recovery ❑Treat ❑ Temporary Evacuatio,dRulocatlon of Residents ❑Re-use ❑ Temporary Water Supplies ®Recycle Actual Volume: 1 .QD cubic yards ❑ Vent System r]Landfill Actual Volume: cbic yards ❑ GrOundwamr Treatment Systeme u ❑❑C OrumslTankslCantainas Other: 1..1 NAPL ❑ Other: _ ❑ ASSESSMENT ONLY N. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS! Except whmu previously sulxNlletl and specified'Submit all documentation,plans,and/or reports necessary to support the RAO to the Department,including,without limilation.the following: " • For all Class A RAOs,Information documenting the extent 10 which levels of oil and/or hazardous material in the environment have been reduced to background'and for all Class A-2 and A-3 RAOs,the results of the feasibility evaluation Conducted pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0800 demonstrating[hal the achievement of background is not feasible. • Fpr all Class A and Class 8 RAOS,information supporting No Conclusion that a level o1 No Significant Risk has been achieved or exists. • For all Gess A RAOS and where applicable to Class C RAOs,a demonstration that 00 uncontrolled sources,as specified In 310 CMP 40.1003(5)have been eliminated or controlled. • nor an Class C RAOfi,intormatim Supporbng the Conclusion that re,substantial hazards remain Of the disposal site. • Fo,all Class C RAOs,a copy of the plan.as speceied in 310 CMR 40.0881 2 h,which resents dellNove and enterprising to be taken toward achieving a P•rmanont Solution at the disposal ( H ) P P p stops sae. Revised 10/1193 This 101m is printed ca racyUed paper. Page 2013 SERRFINIiDRRLING TEL No .508-?41-4683 3u1 27,94 15 :58 No .005 P. 13 1 Massachusetts Department of Environmental protection BWSC-004 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup D RESPONSE ACTION UTCOME (RAO) STATEMENT ( T Rebase lracu gtvmx (pursuant to 310 CMR 40.1056) a s I�_ 0039 1. LSP OPINION: 1�---+ Name of organization. Norfolk t:nyironmental LSPNome: Brian V. Moran •, nue: ..Vice President 7efephone617 -297 •• 5200 Ext._..._. - - I atlest that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information contained in this submillal,including any and all documents accompanying ibis attestation,and in my professional judgment,the response action(A)that is the Subject Of this submittal complies with the provisions of M.G.L.a 21A, §§ 19-194.309 CMR,M.G.I.c, 2115,310 CMR 40.0000,and all other laws, regulations, orders,permits,and approvals applicable to such response action(a). 1 am aware that significant penalties may result,including,but not fimiled to.Possible Anes and imprisonment.it I wi ully submil information which I know to be false,inaccurate or incomplete- Signa or$: n�V.�"1�'\ l'" � %}ZN OF k,�j r'c Date: ? �1S ._ Seat: ro BRIAN yam, 7351 ar v License Number m� 100NA4 -� f No.7.0 J. CERTIFICATION OF PERSON SUBMITTING RAO STATEMENT: 1 certify under penalties of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information contained in this submittal,Including any and all doctim!0a-a co anying Ibis certification,and that,based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the inlormetigq¢nnt,me matoti infermali0 mai ed herein is,tO the best of my knmlodge and belief,true,accurate and complete. I am aware that there afC significant no liie ,i (Wing, ut not limited to,possible fines and Imprisonment tot wilfully submitting false.inacewale,or incomplet information, Signature:' n-t 1 A:t Date: -1.-_ ! (J � . Name of Persoft(print): Pd Bedttie l Revised 1011133 7ttis to n is p�mtod on recycled paper. Page 3 of 3 SERRFINIiDARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 ,94 15 :58 No .005 P . 14 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection BWSC-015 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup OhntlsEr Sae NUT4E,: LSPSMITFORM OPINION TRANSMITTAL FORM (pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0600) 3 0039 A. DISPOSAL SITE)LOCATION TO BE INVESTIGATED(LTBI)INFORMATION: Provide the fuiluwing information as it appears on fire 1993 List of confirmed Disposal saes and Locations to he Investigated 11993 Transition List) Oisposalshen.TRINamc _Fafard Construction _ ____ Street: 58 Swampscott Road _ ... Cilyttown _Zalellf-, MA _ _ ...... Zip coda: O1q?D Site Status(chock one). 13d LecatiOn to be investigated(LTRO ( Unclasslhed l.rsposal Sito LJ Non-priority Disposal site without a Waive, Oete first listed in above category: 7 / 1 S/—94 B. PERSON SUBMITTING LSP EVALUATION OPINION TRANSMITTAL FORM: Name of organuaron. Fafard Real .Kstate 8 Development Co. Nameolcontact:Paul. Beattie __ .. _ _ laiet pS2 ate. 4oun581 Sweet: 290.-F11 int Si rPPt city/Town: Ashland __- State: MA 7ipCoca: 01.721_ _ Telephu,w: 508 — _881_— 1600 Fxl ... _ ........ C. RELATIONSHIP TO DISPOSAL SITE/LOCATION TO BE INVESTIGATED OF PERSON SUBMITTING LSP EVALUATION OPINION TRANSMITTAL FORMi t (check ono/spocty) �] RP Speciy(circle one)- er C7(rerator Generator Transporter Other RP; ❑ PI1F Specify(circle one): Owner Operator Generalor Transporter Othor PRP: , Ll Glher Fersort ___,., .. ._.. D. TRANSITION SITE LSP EVALUATION OPINION: Cneck one of the Itelumig upiniuus. 1 he location is eel a disposal site where a reportable release or Threat of release of oil and/or hazardous materials as described In 310 Chili 40.0300 has occurred and nu fmow,,uyunse aeliufr.ate requited. asJ A raponahle rebase or threat of release as dearrihed by 310 cMH 40.0300 has occurred or may have occurred al the location but response actions completed poor to the date of this opinion meet the requirements of a Response Action Outcome Pursuant 10 310 CMR 4V.l000- If this response is CireokeU,a Response Action Outcome Statement must be auachad. (optional Attachment— L.I A reportable release D throat of release as described at 310 CMH 40.0300 has occurred or..Transit. on Site y ave occurre at the loosit and further response actions are necessary. If this response is chocked,indicate which of the following types)of documentation is attached. LJ Release Abatement Measure(RAM)Plan n Tier Classification Submiilal Tic,I Permit Application L I he location,s a disposal site that is adequatety regulated pursuant to 310 CMR 40.01 10. 11 this response is checked.indicate which other program applies: LJ Response actions at this site,which are being conduce)as a HSWA Corrective Action,are adequately regulated pmsuanl to 310 CMR 40.0112 L Response actions at IMS site.which is a 21C facility.ere adequately regulated under the KRA Authorized Slate Hadar(foua Waste Program(MG.L.c 21C and 310 CMR 30.000)pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0113. ❑ Response actions at this site.which is a Solid Waste Management Facility,are adequately regulated under M.G.L.c. 7111, M L c-i 11§150A and/or 310 CMR 19.000 pursuant 10 310 CMR 40.0114. Revised 10115193 This lam ipprinlad on recycled paper- Paget oft SERRFINI/DARLING TEL No .508-741-4683 Jul 27 ,94 15 :58 N0 .005 P . 15 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection BWSC-015 Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup LSP EVALUATION OPINION D*e0"'SneN" bxl ' TRANSMITTAL FORM (Pursuant to 318 CMR 40.06001 131-1 0039 E. LSP WHO PROVIDED THIS EVALUATION OPINION: Name of organization: Norfolk Environmental LSPName: Brian M. Moran, P.E. 1kleVic__ e- PrPaisjga *1elpphonr:617_293--IuIN Ext. I attest met I have personally examined and an, [&miller with the information contained in this submittal. including any and all documents accompanying this attestation,and in my professional judgment this transition site evaluation opinion and form complies with the provisions of M.G.L. a 21A. §§ 19.19J, 309 CMR. M L c- 21E, 310 CMR 40.0000• and all other laws,regulations• orders, permits, and approvals applicable to such transition site evaluation opinion. 1 am aware that significant penWlies may result,including.but not limited to.possible linos and imprisonment,it I wilfully submit information which 1 know t0 be false,Maccufale or Incomplete. signature: . /�:••+ �/+ &A. Seal: Dale Lirenso Number 7351 co BRIAN oy` u MofiA1J i No.73'il %, 6".8 s/A rr" jq v F. CERTIFICATION OF PERSON SUBMITTING LSP EVALUATION OPINION TRANSMITTAL FORM: I certify under penalties of law that 1 have personally examined and am familiar wflh the information contained In this submittal,including any and all documents accompanying this certification,and that,based on my Inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining lh,,information,the material information contained herein is,to the best of my knowledge and belief,true,accurate and complete. 1 am aware that there aro significant penalties.Including,but not limited to, possible fines and imprisonment,for wilfully submitting false,inaccurate,or utconiplele Information. i Name of pe dint): Paul e�ttie� _ Corporate Counsel yf' Tale: Signature: '.a . ' Date: ��� Flevised101*79a - revsferm isprmledonfocycrodpaper. Page 2 oft so Form 2 DEOE Re No. (To he provided by DEOE) t.,ommornveelih ctty/iown Salem _ oiMassachusetts ApDlFafard imnL Determination of Applicability Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, G.L c. 131, §40 From Salem Conservation Commission Issuing Authority Fafard<Companies: same To (Name of person making request) (Name of property owner) Address 290 Elliot 'St "Ashland,. MA Address This determination is issued and delivered as follows: p by hand delivery to person making request on (date) (3 by ceriffied mail,return receipt requested on (date) Pursuant to the authority of CLL G 131, §40,the C n spry n r; r has considered your request for a Determination of Applicability and its supporting documentation, and has made the following determination(check whichever is applicable): This Determination is positive: 1. The area described below, which includes afUpart of the area described in your request, is an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act.Therefore, any removing, filling, dredging or altering of that area requires the filing of a Notice of Intent The Commission has determined that Wetlands 11162 of the "Resource Mapping in Salem, _MA:" dated 8/27/87, are isolated land subject to flooding. 2. ❑ The work described below,which includes all/part of the work described in your request,is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act and will remove, fill, dredge or after that area.There- fore,said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. 2.1 S1 3. ❑ The work described below,which includes all/part of the work described in your request, is within the Buffer Zone as defined in the regulations, and will after an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act.Therefore, said work requires the filing of a Notice of Intent. This Determination is negative: 1. ❑ The area described in your request is not an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act. ' 2. ❑ The work described in your request is within an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act, but will not remove, rill, dredge, or after that area.Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 3. ❑ The work described in your request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but wiJ not alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Act.Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent. 4. ❑ The area described in your request is Subject to Protection Under the Act, but since the work described therein meets the requirements for the following exemption,as specified in the Act and the regulations, no Notice of Intent is required: Issued by } Conservation Commission Signature(s) 'This Determination must be signed by a mzjonty of the Conservation Commission. On thiqh day of -P.4, r'�'� 19 g 7 before me personally appeared j^ N c f_ ^ ` `-9,, to me known to.be Mri person described in, and who executed, the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/ctle executed the a as his/her fre act and deed. /I PSy.Lommisvon txPirer August 12, 19994 Notary Public My commission expires This Delermina on does not relieve the applicant from comohnng w,m all other applicable federal,state or local statutes,ordinances. by-laws or regulations.This Determination small be valid for three yews loan the date of issuance. - The aoolicanl.the owner,any parson aggrieved by this Determination,any owner of land abutting the 18ntl upon which the proposed work is to be done.or any ten residents of the city or:own in which such land is located.are hereby notified o1 their might to reeues:the Department of Environmental Quality Engineenng to issue a Suoerseding Delermfnation of AopllcaNlity,prowc.ng the reauest is made by certified mail or hard oeimery to the Debwrtment w,min len days from the date of issuance of this Oetenlfinabon.A copy of the reauest shall at the same time be sent oy cerblied mail or hand delivery to the conservation cornrnieaion and the aoplicam. 2.2A ' r THE FAFARO COMPANIES 290 Eliot Street/Ashland,MA 01721 508-1381-1600 Fax M 5OB-875-8610 H.A. Fafard &Sons Canst...tion, Inc. Fafard Real Estate July 30, 1992 1 Mr. John Serafini Sr. Esq. Serafini , Serafini & Darling 65 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Salem Conservation Commission Dear Mr. Serafini : As you requested, the purpose of this letter is to document the street addresses of several parcels of land and to state that we do not have any information on hazardous wastes at the sites. Parcel 1 This parcel is located at 58 Swampscott road and was proposed for an industrial condominium. This parcel is listed in the published report "List of Confirmed Disposal Sites and Locations to be Investigated, July 15, 1987 prepared by the Division of Hazardous Waste Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. DEP, on December 1, 1989 issued a notice which suspended DEP oversight for this location. Attached please find a copy of the DEP Notice as well as a memo of December 19, 1989 from Kurz Associates, Inc. which gives their opinion of this site. Parcel 2 This parcel is located at First Street and Traders Way and was proposed for an extension of a drain line. There is no specific street address. This parcel is not listed in the published report "List of Confirmed Disposal Sites and Locations to be Investigated, July 15, 1987 prepared by the Division of Hazardous Waste Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. We do not know of any hazardous wastes at this site. If we can provide you with any additional information on this matter please do not hesitate to contact us at (508) 881-1600. Very truly yours, ()nic'e Hannert nning & Land Use Coordinator file:serafini l + ` F.nvironmemal, Civil, Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Consultants i 4 First Street Bridgewater, MA 02324 Kurz Associates, Inc. (50g1697.3191 FAX (5(18),097-?996 December 19, 1989 C7 Project No. 1730 AUG "i999 SAR PL Mr. Paul Beattie The Fafard Companies 290 Ashland Street Ashland, MA 01721 RE: Suspension of D.E.P. Oversite D.E.P. Site No. 3-0039 58 Swampscott Road Salem, Massachusetts Dear Mr. Beattie: Pursuant to our conversation on December 81 1989, this letter is intended to outline our opinion of the relevance of the Department of Environmental Protection's (D.E.P. ) suspension of oversite at the 58 Swampscott Road site in Salem , Massachusetts . The Fafard . Companies were notified of this suspension in a December 11 1989 letter from the D.E.P. In September of 1989 , a Phase II Site Investigation, consistant with the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (310 CMR 40.545) was completed for the site by Kurz Associates, Inc. The Phase SI Site Investigation concluded that a release, or releases, of various volatile organic compounds , base/neutral and acid extractable compounds , polychlorinated biphenyls, and total petroleum hydrocarbon oil and grease at the subject site does not represent an imminent hazard to human health, safety, publke welfare, or the environment. Kurz Assocites, Inc. was and is• of the opinion that additional remedial activities at the subject site are unwarranted.. However, Kurz Assocites , Inc. has„ ty recommended that continued groundwater monitoring be performed" on the subject site. In light of this information, the D.E.P. 's suspension of , oversite appears to have little significance, as there appears to be little reason for further D.E.P. involvment, with the possible exception of maintaining oversite of groundwater monitoring on the site. The site remains a location to be investigated on the D.E.P. listing of " Confirmed Disposal Sites and Locations To Be Investigated " as of the October 15, 1989 update . T — �e�barti�zeizb o�f�'�urrr�run�ztaG qty, c���u�, lff, Yz14oilaiz, Onatolz, - nrr`icasL _Ryio z S.� G'omnzofwea�v .,�i�e�ur� Daniel S. Greenbaum ff'2MaCjWv'rttd' 0;,&0/ Commissioner 617/935-2160 RE: NOTIFICATION T jNUMBER DATE: WETLANDS/_ (city/town) This Department is in receipt of the following application filed in accordance with the Wetlands Protection AAct�j(N.. G . L. Chapter 131, Section 40) : F.PPLICAIT: OWNER OF LAND: ADDRESS : CIU ��/G� � i� ADDRESS : S'fes PROJECT LOCATION: ( (17' This project has been assigned the following file Althoughafile T is being issued, the possible following deficiency (ies) in the filing have been noted: No File :` will be assigned to _h ' roiect until the following missing informa- tion is sent to this office to complete the filing in accordance with the Act. ;Notice of Intent Locus Map ( ) Plans Title 5 Plan Appendix A Documentation COMMENTS : ( ) Application has been forwarded to the Waterways Licensing Program to deter- mihe if a Chapter 91 License is required. ( ) Applicant is advised to forward a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Army Cb=ps of Engineers for Sec. 404 , review (Call 1-800-362-4367 for further information. ( ) Pro ect may require a Water quality Ce- :ificate. Applicant is advised to conact the DEOE Division of water Pollution Control (1 Winter St. , Boston, MA, 02108 ; tel: (617) 292-5673) for forms and further information. ISSUANCE OF A FILE NUMBER INDICATES ONLY COMPLETENESS OF FILING SUBMITTED, NOT APPROVAL OF APPLICATION. cc: ( Conservation Co=issicn 1 Copies also sent to: DEQE Division of Water Pollution Control U. S.Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch City or Town Board of Healtn Office of Coastal Zone Management Owner For the Commissioner w� ectlonice- —� �Cn Reck,_ �coe P:h PY Will Ki4r� Associates. Inc. Page 2 December 19 , 1989 Project #1730 The suspension will probably significantly slow the site' s eventual re-classification to a confirmed disposal site. It is Kurz Associates , Inc . opinion that when the site is re-Classified, it will probably be listed as a non-priority confirmed disposal site, as no imminent hazards have been identified at the site. Though the D.E. P. has suspended oversite, and since no D.E.P. waiver application has been approved by the D.E. P. , all remedial activities at the subject site will still have to be approved,. by the D. E . P . This would include any removal or treatment' of contaminated soil or treatment of contaminated water at the subject site. As stated above, Kurz Associates, Inc. is of the opinion that remedial activities at the subject site are currently unwarranted. However, development of the subject site may necessitate some remedial activity to 'accomodate development plans. If this does occur, some type o£ D.E.P. approval would still lie necessary. As always, if you should have any questions, please feel free to contact one of us at Kurz Associates, Inc. Sincerely, KURZ ASSOCIATES, INC. Brian McAninch Geologist/Project Manager Steven L. Kurz, Ph.D. President HMc/smh/128 ' �U �poy- ST Of ug G1je�ai�tir�en.G of c)iuirr C� ; /f2er c5o/�ta2osto>z - /I�ost�ieasG �eyio� IE/L C1P0&r,W -1ffaS=CXza&t& 0/so/ Daniel S. Greenbaum Commissioner 935-2160 December 1, 1989 Mr. Paul Beattie RE: SALEM - 58 Swampscott Rd. DEF Case No. 3-0039 The Fafard Companies SUSPENSION OF 290 Ashland St. DEP OVERSIGHT Ashland, MA 01721 Dear Mr. Beattie: The purpose of this letter is to notify you that due to personnel constraints within the agency a staff person from the Department ofor Environmental Protection (the Department) will llly rno longbleer be abl onotheesuSject review worl: conducted Jay y as a site. As a result of this suspension of Departmental oversight , further approvals for remedial response actions at this site will not be forthcoming for an indeterminate period of time. Waiver of ADDrovals for Non-Priority Disnosa'.. Sites Under the provisions of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 21E and the Massachusetts Contingency Pian. (MCP) ,' tines"he absencetwo aofedirect eDepartmental ntinue y res onsible i oversight , potential, P site investigation ana response actions or agree .to perform an "at-risk" The cleanup under the "Waiver of Approval:" provisions of the MCP (40*5371 'disposaI latter option is only available for „sites .classified as "non-prio_lty” sites pursuant to 40.544. Proposed site activities which require Departmental approval or a Waiver of Approvals include, but are not limited to, the following: Assessment, excavation and/or disposal of contaminated soils. This includes any proposed construction activities which may involve direct contact with contaminated materials. . instal'-anon of groundwater monitoring wells, soil borings or test .edial action___.....,.> Pits as a ozrt of a comprehensive site 1 I. n.... .I.n.... n.l ,.,. on�,.rinrl Pannr t_ - —•--�•-"" —�� Mr. Paul Beattie _ Page 2 - Installation find/or op-ration of soil or groundwater rennee.at_on syst em. Continued monitoring of groundwater quality from existing monitoring !+ells at a site will not require submittal of a Waiver Application. However, all monitoring results should be submitted to the Department. fact sheet is enclosed in order to inform you of .the Department 's `laiver Application process. Please be advised that tae Department ' s approval_ of a Wai=rer application does not constitute approval of a proposed remedial sponse action. =nrthermore, even with an approved Waver application, s'-1 ,+or'.•: at the site :gust be conducted in accordanca with all applicable XC? requirements and any other applicable Federal, stat- or local permits, lic-uses, or approvals. Short Term Measures nnnrova'_ ' Should a situation arise at the site in which an nent hazard is posed to public health or the environment, then you as a pctcntially rasponsiblp party s`,all contact the De2artment to receive an approval for a Short Term ;Leasure, as outlined in the :ICP (10.5:2) , to abate t is imminent hazard. P'--ease be aware that approval of a.Short Term Measure is genera�ly resewad for sites or locations to be investigated where: ° There is the potential for fire or explosion. ° The potantial for direct contact with oil or hazardous material exists. ° Continued or future migration of oil or hazardous materials constitute an imminent threat to the environment. - [see 10.512 (2) of the :".CP] In addition, disposal of contaminated soils to an off site location Test be approved by the Department. The decision by the Department to suspend its active involvement in assessment and cleanup activities at this site is unfortunate. However, be advised that there are currently more than 2000 pending cases within this office. Relative to the subject site, many of these cases appear to present a greater or more immediate threat to public health and the envr_ronment . Accordingly, given the agency's staffing limitations, the Department is compelled to allocate :'a l'mlt2d resources .n a .banner which Jest protects these inter-sts. ,.. �... TX*'.., ea..,,-,.;wr "o,°; ;r,{.s�5i�:• d v ._.;�'? r +f+`r. FC }�t:'}':a a5+pi a. :,,:e : r i � .., s / Mr. Paul Beattie Page 3 All future correspondence regarding this site should reference the case number designated in the subject heading. Very truly yours, John W. Duggan , Environmental Engineer Ric'. rd J. Chalp Regional Engineer RJC/JD/ae cc: DEP, BWSC, 1 Winter St. , Boston, MA 02103 Salem BOH L SERAFINI, SERAFINI AND DARLING ATTORNEYS AT LAW 63 FEDERAL STREET SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 JOHN R. SERAFINI. SR. TELEPHONE JOHN R, SERAFINI,JR. 508-744-0212 JOHN E, DARLING 617-581-2743 ELLEN M. WINKLER TELECO PIER JOSEPH C, CORRENTI 506741-4663 October 6, 1992 VIA FAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Ms. Debra Hurlburt Planning Department City of Salem One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 RE: Fafard Companies Dear Deb: In response to your question, the transfer was made pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court approved plan for reorganization. Econdo Manufacturing Corp. , which is a Fafard corporation, has been merged into Fafard Real Estate and Development Corp. which is owned by the same principals, Howard A. Fafard and his wife. Sincerely, OHN R. SERAFINI, SR. JRS, SR. JIn enclosure `.�JoN Cp�� h V 2 Conservatim C"nmissim J Z Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ASS September 21, 1992 ! Attorney John R. Serafini , Sr . 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Extension Permits for 58 Swampscott Rd and Traders Way and First Street Dear Attorney Serafini : This letter is in our response to letter P Y dated August 5, 1992 which included additional information regarding the request for Extension Permits for 58 Swampscott Road and a parcel located at Traders Way and First Street . On February 29 , 1992, the Department of Environmental Protection issued a letter indicating various lists of Confirmed Disposal Sites and To Be Investigated Sites within Salem. Of these To Be Investigaged Sites was Route 107 and Swampscott Road (known to the Conservation Commission as 58 Swampscott Road) was listed as a location To Be Investigated. Due to this letter the Conservation Commission had requested that a report by an environmental consulting firm be submitted to the Conservation Commission either confirming or invalidating whether this was .a 21E site. The Commission also wanted information as to the status of Traders Way j and First Street and whether this site should be assessed. A report was submitted to the Conservation Commission from your office by Kurz Associates, Inc. environmental consultants regarding 58 Swampscott Road. After careful review of this report the Conservation Commission still believes that the question as to whether 58 Swampscott Road is a 21E site remains unanswered to consider your request for an extension. w i Attorney Serafini 's Letter Page - 2 September 21, 1992 w , jT ,, Regarding your request for granting an Extension Permit for Traders Way and First Street , the Commission has approved this . request due to the fact that this site was not listed on the DEP's of lists of Confirmed Disposal sites and To Be Investigatedjsites. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me or Conservation Commission Administrator , Debbie Hurlburt at 745-9595 �j`' ext . 311. 4, a, t ad Sincerely, T. : Betsy Horne / ur ' Chait jm\jm\horne' s. ltr ;t. 4 ^ 1 s t fit i r^' y. i 1' i September 17, 1993 John R. Serafini , Senior Serafini , Serafini & Darling 63 Federal Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Dear Mr. Serafini : As follow up to our telephone discussion today, I wanted to confirm issues that have arisen as a result of a request for Order of Conditions extensions for two Fafard projects. Although the Conservation Commission agreed to provide these same properties (64-152 and 64-178) extensions a year ago, a brief review of the files has resulted in a number of questions: • The January 1993 DEP list of 21E sites includes one for Fafard Construction, Route 107 & Swampscott Road, originally added to the list in July 1987. I am unclear whether the 21E site includes only the property for the 64-178 project or spans all or part of the 64-152 project as well. I would also appreciate knowing the status of the preliminary assessment the state list indicates is underway and what information that study has revealed to date. • The Notices of Intent indicate that the sites are Isolated Land Subject to Flooding, a designation I question. Is there documentation in the City Engineer's files showing the historic hydrologic regime for those areas? Project 64-152 The file for 64-152 , The Rich's Distribution Center on Lot 63 , Map 7 , contains an Environmental Notification Form, dated June 1986 . It indicates a project of 35-plus acres of which A 4500 square feet of wetlands will be filled to allow J construction of a driveway and a 10 ,000 square foot wetland replication project. The ENF contains a hand-drawn map, Exhibit A, noting the location of both the filling and the replication. I was unable to find any details about the replication project or any discussion in the NOI. j-, The ENT states that some 600 to 700 cubic yards of contaminated soil will be removed along with 55-gallon drums. The ENF references a groundwater monitoring program being conducted by Kurz Associates. What is the soil contaminated with, what is in the 55-gallon drums, what is the status of the Kurz monitoring program and what results have been AGENDA NEW HAMPSHIRE PLATING SUPERFUND SITE MERRIMACK, NEW HAMPSHIRE WEDNESDAY, JUNE Sit 1993 Welcome and Introduction Dan Coughlin, Chief, New Hampshire Superfund Section Superfund Process Dick Goehlert, Remedial Project Manager Background Dick Goehlert Community Relations Dick Goehlert Activities Remedial Investigation Dick Goehlert Activities Investigation Schedule Dick Goehlert Question and Answer Dan Coughlin, Period Moderator obtained to date? I am concerned that the contaminated soil may be a continuing source of groundwater contamination. The NOI states that approximately 550 square feet of ILSF will be excavated to an elevation to provide a stable slope for parking spaces . It further states that drainage capacity is compensated through use of an existing wetland to the north. What does this mean and how does that approach fit with the replication project referenced in the ENF? • Finally, the special conditions may need some beefing up. SC 5 requires the installation of gas traps in catch basins but no provision exists for maintenance. SC 6 requires Commission approval of an EIR from EDEA. Has an EIR been prepared and has it been forwarded for the Commission's approval? Project 64-178 The file for project 64-178 , located at 58 Swampscott Road, contains a December 1, 1989 letter, from DEQE (DEP) indicating that the company can either continue to monitor the site or submit a waiver application. This is a clear reference to the 21E status. Although the NOI was presented to the Commission in April of that year, I could not find any further discussion of how the applicant would be dealing with the potential contamination on site as it would impact the resource area. This troubles me. • As is the case for 64-152 , SC 5 does not address maintenance for the catch basins. I recognize that a crisp response to each of these issues may not be obtainable by the Commission's next meeting, on September 23.7 I am prepared, however, to recommend to the members that evening that we vote to extend both Orders for one month to allow sufficient time for the applicant to respond. Please contact Debbie Hurlburt by noon on Thursday, the 23rd, to indicate whether a representative of the applicant will appear at the meeting that night to address these matters or whether you wish us to proceed with the one month extension approach. In the latter case, we should add an agenda item for our meeting on October 28 to hear a response to these matters and to address the request for extensions. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of these issues. Sincerely, Betsy Horne Chair The Station No. 1 well was pumped at a steady rate of 400 gpm for 11 days. Prior to the start of the test the well had not been pumped for 15 days. The pumped water was used by the municipality or discharged through fire hydrants located outside the area of the test ' s influence. Water level measurements were obtained from a total of 22 wells and 2 piezometers. These wells are indicated in Figure 2-3. Most observation wells were screened in the lower portion of the glacial drift aquifer, however, a few bedrock wells were also monitored to determine the degree of hydraulic connection between the glacial drift and bedrock flow systems (See Section 3. 4 for a discussion of the Site hydrogeology) . The piezometers were shallow wells with 10-foot-long screens which intersected the water table. Regularly spaced readings were obtained from 13 wells, with occasional readings taken from the remaining 9 wells and 2 piezometers. Pressure transducers and data loggers were used to register the regularly spaced readings, while manual measurements were taken, using an M-scope or popper, in the wells where occasional readings were obtained. The transducer readings were verified daily by supplemental manual measurements. Water levels in the Station No. 1 well were also recorded on a continuous strip chart recorder, along with the pumping rate. Table 2-7 lists the observation wells used during the test, their distances from the pumping well, drawdowns measured during the 11th day of pumping, and the measurement technique for each well. For 3 days prior to the test and throughout its duration, background water level readings were obtained from a well outside the area of influence of the test (ERT-14) , to provide data on background water level fluctuations . At the conclusion of pumping activities, 2 days of water level recovery measurements were obtained from the observation wells to determine the rate of their recovery. Surface water flow rates were also periodically measured in Argilla Brook both upstream and downstream of the Station No. 1 well prior to and during the pumping test. These measurements were obtained to quantify the rate of stream recharge to the aquifer that occurred during the test . The flow measurement technique is described in Section 2.6. To identify any changes in water quality due to the aquifer response to the pumping of the Station No. 1 well, a number of other wells were sampled prior to and immediately after the conclusion of the pumping test. The samples were collected using the methods described in the SAP and were analyzed for volatile organics. The Station No. 1 well was also sampled twice per each log cycle during the pumping test . These samples were analyzed for volatile organics, metals, and common anions . Additional information on groundwater sampling and analysis is presented in Section 2 .4. The pumping test evaluation is discussed in Section 3 . 0 . The raw data and associated calculations are included in Appendix C. W91059DF 2-10 VON OO,��i C"isf'Vafim CiOri1IY11mim Salem. Massachusetts 01970 �ASsn�N TO: Conservation Commission Members FROM: Beth Debski, Assistant City Planner RE: Proposed Modified Order of Conditions - Thermal Circuits - 58 Swampscott Road DATE: April 10, 1995 On Thursday, April 13, 1995, the Conservation Commission will meet to review a proposal at the request of The Fafard Real Estate and Development Corporation for the construction of a roadway and associated utilities to service the proposed Swampscott Road Industrial Park and the construction of a 52,000 s.f. building to house Thermal Circuits within the Industrial Park. Specifically, Fafard is requesting a modification of Order of Conditions #64-178 which was issued by the Salem Conservation Commission on April 27, 1989. The Commission has voted on several Extension Permits. The latest extension was approved by the Commission on July 28, 1994 and will expire on July 24, 1996. I thought it might be helpful to provide a brief description of the proposed Swampscott Road Industrial Park and the Thermal Circuits facility. The proposed 29-acre Swampscott Road Industrial Park will contain six parcels. The potential build-out of the industrial park will include 200,000 - 300,000 square feet of industrial space. When fully developed, the park will generate $260,000 in tax revenue and create up to 1,000 full-time jobs. Thermal Circuits has been located in Salem for 25 years. This innovative manufacturer of surface heaters and heater assemblies has outgrown its Jefferson Avenue facility and will expand in Salem. Thermal Circuits will continue to operate its existing Jefferson Avenue facility upon completion of the new Swampscott Road facility. Thermal Circuits presently employs 85 people and plans to add 40 employees over the next three years. As you may know, Mayor Harrington and other City officials have been working closely with Thermal Circuits over the last several months to convince Thermal Circuits to forego plans to move out of the City and keep their long time Salem business in Salem. In September, the Massachusetts Economic Assistance Coordinating Council designated the Beverly-Salem Regional Economic Target Area. Qualified companies that locate to or expand in Salem are eligible for state and local tax benefits not available in other areas of Massachusetts. The City of Salem has used its Economic Target Area(ETA) designation to provide development incentives in the form of property tax reductions to Thermal Circuits. On March 9, 1995, the Salem City Council approved a 10-year tax increment financing (TIF) plan for Thermal Circuits. During the life of the TIF Plan, the City will exempt part of the new value of the property (the increment) from real estate taxes. The company will continue to pay taxes on the value of the property prior to new construction. The City Council also declared Thermal Circuits a "certified project" allowing the company to receive State tax credits as well as local property tax abatements. On March 30, 1995, the Massachusetts Economic Assistance Coordinating Council approved Thermal Circuits "certified project" status and endorsed the Tax Increment Financing deal negotiated by the City and Thermal Circuits. As you can see, there has been a tremendous amount of cooperation among City, State, and Thermal Circuits representatives to bring this project to fruition. Mayor Harrington has committed to Thermal Circuits that the City will do everything in its power to ensure an expeditious permitting process for this project. In an unprecedented move, on April 6, 1995, the Salem Planning Board held a public hearing and voted unanimously to issue a decision for this project in one evening. The Planning Board approved a Definitive Subdivision Plan for the construction of the road and utilities to service the Swampscott Road Industrial Park. In addition, the Board granted a Site Plan Review Special Permit, Business Park Development Special Permit, and a Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit for the construction of the Thermal Circuits facility. I have included a copy of Order of Conditions #64-178 and the latest Extension Permit for your review. I have also included a copy of the original Notice of Intent and a copy of the proposed plans. Attorney Joseph Correnti, and representatives of Fafard will present their plans to the Commission and answer any questions the Commission may have. �oN Co z� ��° COi11Sel'Vd�1011 (,�01111111SS1011 Salem. Massachusetts 01970 ASSn�N�y TO: Conservation Commission Members FROM: Beth Debski, Assist cjtlan r RE: Thermal Circuits DATE: April 12, 1995 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have enclosed additional information regarding the Thermal Circuits project. When reviewing the files for 58 Swampscott Road, I did not realize that there were two Orders of Conditions pertaining to this property. File #64-178, which I sent to you earlier this week, was for the proposed construction of Industrial Condominiums within the proposed Salem Business Park. The actual request before the Conservation Commission on Thursday will be to modify file #64- 152 which was the Order of Conditions issued for the proposed Rich's Distribution Center. Order of Conditions k64-152 encompasses the entire site, as does the proposal before us on Thursday which includes the Swampscott Road Industrial Park and Thermal Circuits. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused. If you have any questions regarding the Thermal Circuits project, please do not hesitate to contact me before the meeting on Thursday. jm/bd/cctherm